David Jaffe Predicts Next Console Generation Will Be the Last

googleback

New member
Apr 15, 2009
516
0
0
I completely agree. the $60 model is unsustainable.
why do you think most games flop these days?

if a game like Vanquish had sold for 20-30 dollars and been a downloadable title it would have made much more money in the long run.
 

octafish

New member
Apr 23, 2010
5,137
0
0
I think in 15 years as long as the global economy keeps recovering, consoles will be replaced by cloud gaming.
Fifteen years sounds about right for the end of this generation of consoles and a good long lifespan for the next generation, and a long lifespan is likely with the current state of CPUs GPUs and storage devices. Next Gen will be a beast of a machine no doubt.

While initially retaining legacy distribution via discs, I expect Next Gen will be heavily modeled on Steam's digital distribution system, which would wipe out second hand sales, making developers very happy. It is probably only viable in the first world, but hey they're the ones with the money right? Once people are tied to that model and a need/driver for larger pipes presents itself to the market it is a short leap to cloud gaming. It wouldn't work now but it isn't hard to believe it would in the future.

Just how I see it. I don't find it hard to imagine that people will be using an off site super computer to do the actual computing of gaming while you play with a controller wirelessly connected to your TV/Tablet/Home Computer/Projector.
 

Jumplion

New member
Mar 10, 2008
7,873
0
0
Didn't he say that he supported used game sales a while back in another rambly rant?

And hasn't "the next generation is the last one!" been said to happen ever since the N64 days or whatever?

The $60 business model for sure, but I put the blame more on the brick and mortar stores that take the profit away. In digital distribution, the developers/publisher earn more money by cutting out the middle man. With stores like GameStop and the like, they rake in more money through pre-owned sales so they encourage that, and they also get a share from new games sold.

In this case, I sympathize with EA and their "Project $10" here, they're just trying to make back the money that they need to rake in a profit. Obviously it's not ideal, but there must be some way to get some money from used game sales without feeling like you're taking half the game away from them.

The increase cost in making games will most likely increase the cost of selling them next generation unless we do something about it. Hell, the PC is getting infected by this as well, starting with Black Ops selling at $60 at launch, and now more games are following that model.
 

Dana22

New member
Sep 10, 2008
1,274
0
0
Ekit said:
LordSphinx said:
He's just a man-child doing games for himself: power fantasy with over-the-top violence.
God of War is not just a regular power fantasy with over-the-top violence.
Yes it is, with the exception of the first game in the series.

And yeah Ive also said consoles as we know it are dying, in MovieBobs topic.
 

the Dept of Science

New member
Nov 9, 2009
1,007
0
0
Baresark said:
the Dept of Science said:
Nazrel said:
I can see this current generation being the last. Not because it's dying, but because there's really nowhere to go.

What are they going to do? More graphics and processing power? They can't use what is currently available and are driving themselves into the ground trying.

Barring some dramatic change in the very nature of game play, there's really no reasonable reason to have one.
I second this opinion. I know there's a recurring theme in history of people claiming that there isn't much further we can go in a certain area before being proved horribly wrong (see "I see a day when the world will only need 5 computers"). Games can render entire worlds in great detail nowadays. It's impossible for graphics to improve like they did when they stepped up from PS2 to PS3. Graphics and physics engines need only fine tuning, a major step forwards would be impossible. Even the recent changes in the nature of play seem to have been accounted for with peripherals, for example the shift from controller to motion control.
The only thing I can imagine there being a need for an upgrade would be, say accurate AI simulations (could the AI race be the new graphics race?).
As it stands now, Consoles are at least a generation behind current PC's. Consoles could use a new iteration. I think the same thing about graphics every few years myself though. They couldn't get any better than they are now, or Just a few minor tweaks and it will be perfect. In the 90's, FMV games were all the rage, and I thought that would be the epitome of what games would become, but now you couldn't even watch those FMV games, it would be painful. There is always room for improvement. And substantial improvement at that. Graphically, DirectX 11 completely blows away DirectX 10, and I didn't see that coming at all.
On the other hand, if you look at how graphics have progressed through time, the changes have been getting smaller and smaller. Lets compare games of the same series.
Half Life was released in 1998. I'm not too familiar with games from this period but I'm pretty sure that HL was considered good looking for its time. HL2 comes out 2004, 6 years later. Completely different graphics engine and physics engine. I seem to recall thinking when playing HL2 that graphics couldn't get much better from this point. The terrain and objects were all detailed and the people all looked like people. I could see that there was room for higher resolution textures and better special effects, but I would still give it a very decent 8 out of 10.
Now we are 6 years on again and Valve are still putting things out on the same engine. Now, HL2 was the best looking game at the time whereas now their games look merely good rather than mindblowing. But think how if you tried to sell a game with HL1 graphics in 2004 you would be laughed at, whereas most of us are planning to shell out for Portal 2, still using a version of the HL2 engine (although somewhat upgraded).

You could similarly compare Far Cry (2004), Crysis (2007) and Crysis 2 or Morrowind (2002), Oblivion (2006) and Skyrim.
In all these series, the improvement between the first and second games is far greater than that between the second and third.
 

mrF00bar

New member
Mar 17, 2009
591
0
0
I doubt PC or console gaming will die out, different things will obviously change but they will still be there. I for one have heard a few times from different people 'The [insert console name] will kill PC gaming' and every time I have the last laugh so its not really a worry for me.
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
Sir John the Net Knight said:
Developers can solve this problem by lowering the prices. It's as simple as that. Sorry, Jaffe. I don't agree with you on this one.
^What he said.

Lower prices means more people can and will buy games, which means more profit. For proof of this, see the Steam sales, where games sell stupidly high amounts of copies for really cheap.
 

LawlessSquirrel

New member
Jun 9, 2010
1,105
0
0
I believe he's correct in that consoles will eventually come to an end, but most likely more in the sense that dedicated consoles will come to an end. There'll likely still be devices filling the function of consoles, but even now they're heavy on the multi-media support.

I'm a bit confused though. What's this $60 issue? I'm certain that's an American thing, but for clarity: is he saying that $60 is too expensive when all things are considered?
 

TheAmazingHobo

New member
Oct 26, 2010
505
0
0
Yes, he is correct!
Without any shadow of a minuscle doubt!

Because giant, blockbuster games become financially impractical, there won´t be any new consoles anymore. Because what was exciting and interesting for the future about THIS generation of consoles wasn´t alternative modes of control or new ways of content delivery or a plethora of easily avaible indie games!
It was Giant Gears of Duty Wars 10: The search for the electric dildo of mass destruction.

..... what a f*cking idiot.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
He's probably right. You can't push much more powerful hardware at a price consumers are willing to pay without selling at a loss; you can't raise the prices on games to make back a shortfall on the hardware. It's pretty hard to make a high-definition game without a large staff, and all of those people have to eat. If the game doesn't sell in pretty significant numbers, that staff isn't sustainable.

And that's putting aside, y'know, the basic economic malaise and looming resource shortages...
 

ZombieGenesis

New member
Apr 15, 2009
1,909
0
0
Simple solution. Retailers sell the disks, you buy a code from the developers online.
No more pre-owned sales.
 

ReiverCorrupter

New member
Jun 4, 2010
629
0
0
DP155ToneZone said:
So, we've heard that PC gaming is dying.

Now console gaming is dying.

Are games just fated to die or what?

People really talk out of their arses whenever they infer that "X style" gaming is dying.
I think it's just publishers bellyaching that they don't get money from the pre-owned market. Trying to scare us into buying new games by making us think that if we don't videogaming will die.

LOL. If consoles and PCs BOTH die, then video games will die. The only games will be Pokemon and iPhone apps. I'm sorry but there's just NO way that that's going to happen when there's such a demand for console games. The industry will adapt.

Plus, there's also the fact that the next gen will probably have photo-realistic graphics, at which point the competition will once again be centered around game play, entering us into another golden age of gaming.

These are empty scare tactics. They don't mean much.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
Well, the problem with his logic, and most of the industry whining about piracy and such, is simply that the gaming industry as a whole is making billions of dollars. Piracy and used game sales can at best be looked at as potential lost sales, but don't represent any real loss to the massive truckloads of cash still being made by successful games.

Now of course in any industry there are going to be failures, movies tank, TV shows tank, music tanks, it's common for the entertainment industry, and the gaming industry is producing a LOT of material and as a result your going to see a decent number of failures. Especially when your looking at an increasingly "grindhouse" mentality where game companies want to put out constant streams of games, obviously that means a lot of trash is going to be developed. I mean heck, how many games is EA currently flooding the market with? Dead Space 2, The Sims Medieval, Dragon Age 2, Darkspore, oh yeah and "Old Republic Online"... that's all right now. We have more games coming out later this year, and I'm probably forgetting some. With that kind of grindhouse releasing, it's unreasonable for them, or anyone, to expect all those games to be successful and profitable. Heck, they even have developers famous for slow, high quality development, like "Bioware" juggling multiple products to spam the market.

I think gloom and doom predictions about the game industry are based on a combination of factors. One is simply that the profits are not meeting the increasingly rising expectations of the game producers. It's not so much about making money, or even a LOT of money, it's a matter of making more money than anything else ever seen before in the industry. Something like "Black Ops." gets released and the entire industry is so detached from reality where they begin to see anything that is not successful on the same level as somehow being a failure. It's sort of like people implying that the PSP is a failure just because the DS outperformed it, it still moved huge numbers of units, and made a lot of money, by any objective standards it's a successful product.

I also think the whole "change of format" thing is a matter of wishful thinking on the part of the industry. Simply put there is a lot of money to be made by cutting out packaging and distribution, all of which the industry wants to pocket. The cost to doing this is to the consumers giving up what control they already have over what they buy. It really doesn't benefit the end user at all, and despite hyping it heavily, I think the industry is increasingly getting upset that this technology and infrastructure they are investing in, is not attracting lemming-like consumers at the rate they hoped.

Things like used games don't just "cost them sales" they also represent one of the barriers to the digital technology, because part of the value of a game is to defer the cost by selling it used.

Things like DRM, and "Day one DLC" to encourage the purchuse of new games are actually annoying consumers, and discouragng a lot of people to not buy gams. The industry winds up putting out DRM to prevent piracy, but then losing the sales (perhaps to pirates) because people don't want spyware on their system, or to periodically have their usage tracked through their internet.

What's more don't for a second doubt that the DRM itself is also a big part of the business, not only are the companies making DRM selling it (and now attached by the hips to the industry, since they rely on game companies buying and using it), but anyone who thinks that the gaming industry doesn't wind up using this information to "track usage" and cut advertising and research costs, but they probably sell that data to other companies despite what they might claim, and probably make a lot of money doing so. Basically the industry looks at all the money to be made by going through people's computers, and then gets touchy when people don't go along with it, and counts that money as a loss.... you know, the billions of dollars of potential revenue they could have on top of the billions they actually made.

The gaming industry isn't in trouble, so much as the gaming industry as we know it now is probably in trouble. Games will never go away, there is a market for decent games, and that will not change. On the other hand the big bussiness aspects of gaming might very well change as they collapse under the weight of their own demands and expectations. Any upheaval is likely to be annoying to us gamers, but ultimatly temporary, and a few years later we probably won't actually notice when it comes to buying and playing our games.

Also, the global economy is changing, and nobody wants to spend the blood to change that at the moment. There are only so many resources on the planet, and simply put the rise of nations like China means more resources are going to them, which means they are coming from the other big countries like the US. As time goes on, you start to see other nations feeling the crunch too as their resources are slowly drained away. The bottom line is that while there is an increasingly higher standard of living (even if not noticable to luxury industries) among those who were heavily impoverished in places like China, and less money
in the pockets of the people who were buying luxury entertainment items like games on average. The nature of the rise in these other places are is that the people being better off does not make them well off enough to become video game consumers, especially given how rife piracy is in those regions to begin with. Even someone with more money in China is not likely to pay top dollar to get a game legitimatly when (as articles, even here on The Escapist if I remember) when they can just go get a pirate copy for a fraction of the cost.

The result is that less money to spend on games, means that the industry is going to have to tighten it's belt, as opposed to looking at how much more it can grab. The industry doesn't have to die, or reduce the quality of games, rather it has to accept that it's not going to be able to measure it's progress in terms of progressive growth, or be expecting crazy profits to come rolling in. Right now your looking at an industry that is both spoiled and has it's expectations warped by the current monster successes of things like the modern "Call Of Duty" franchises.

That's my thoughts at least. I think any upheaval for us as consumers will be temporary no matter what anyone says... but yeah, I think if things continue this way we might very well be seeing a massive reality check for the big gaming businesses and a lot of the ones that don't adapt to having to lower their expectations on returns and such destroying themselves.
 

Disthron

New member
Aug 19, 2009
108
0
0
I wonder if this, and the other artical, is what brought on MovieBob's rant about PC gameing is dead?
 

Gralian

Me, I'm Counting
Sep 24, 2008
1,789
0
0
And then they took the streets, those who had followed the path of the Console,
And took up arms with those who had followed the path of the PC.

They stood beside each other, with a gentle, warming smile
"The day has come", spoke the PC walker,
"When our Console kin embrace our fate of death with life."

And so did the Console disciple smile back at the one from the PC,
A bittersweet smile with an outstretched hand.

For now, those of the Console and of the PC had embraced the same fate.
Death with life, ever lasting.